Friday, December 29, 2023

Electromagnetic fields threaten wildlife

(See the end of this post for additional resources.)


Potential Effects of Anthropogenic Radiofrequency Radiation on Cetaceans

Balmori-de la Puente A, Balmori A. Potential Effects of Anthropogenic Radiofrequency Radiation on Cetaceans. Radiation. 2024; 4(1):1-16. doi: 10.3390/radiation4010001.

​Abstract

Cetaceans are cast to shore for a large number of reasons, although sometimes it is not clear why. This paper reviews the types and causes of cetacean strandings, focusing on mass strandings that lack a direct scientific explanation. Failure of cetacean orientation due to radiofrequency radiation and alterations in the Earth’s magnetic field produced during solar storms stand out among the proposed causes. This paper proposes the possibility that anthropogenic radiofrequency radiation from military and meteorological radars may also cause these strandings in areas where powerful radars exist. A search of accessible databases of military and meteorological radars in the world was carried out. Research articles on mass live strandings of cetaceans were reviewed to find temporal or spatial patterns in the stranding concentrations along the coast. The data showed certain patterns of spatial and temporal evidence in the stranding concentrations along the coast after radar setup and provided a detailed description of how radars may interfere with cetacean echolocation from a physiological standpoint. Plausible mechanisms, such as interference with echolocation systems or pulse communication systems, are proposed. This work is theoretical, but it leads to a hypothesis that could be empirically tested. Further in-depth studies should be carried out to confirm or reject the proposed hypothesis.

Simple Summary

The number of mass stranding events is dramatically increasing in recent decades affecting cetacean diversity and conservation. They consist in the accumulation of cetacean carcasses or live animals along the coast following certain temporal and spatial patterns. Although some cases can be explained based on a combination of physical or biological natural factors, direct human intervention is contributing to many of them. However, there are still many cases with unknown causes that demand to increase the efforts to describe possible new threats to cetacean species. In this context, we evaluate the potential effect of anthropogenic radiofrequency radiation (i.e., from meteorological and military radars) that has had a great expansion in the last years and is known to alter the magnetic receptor organs in several groups of animals. The aim of this work, was to conduct a bibliographic review reporting mass stranding events together with a search of radars in the vicinity areas. The results obtained suggest that anthropogenic radiofrequency radiation may be considered as a novel factor to understand some stranding events with unknown causes and proposes some plausible mechanisms of action.


--

Biological effects of electromagnetic fields on insects: 
a systematic review and meta-analysis

Thill A, Cammaerts MC, Balmori A. Biological effects of electromagnetic fields on insects: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Rev Environ Health. 2023 Nov 23. doi: 10.1515/reveh-2023-0072.

Abstract

Worldwide, insects are declining at an alarming rate. Among other causes, the use of pesticides and modern agricultural practices play a major role in this. Cumulative effects of multiple low-dose toxins and the distribution of toxicants in nature have only started to be investigated in a methodical way. Existing research indicates another factor of anthropogenic origin that could have subtle harmful effects: the increasingly frequent use of electromagnetic fields (EMF) from man-made technologies. This systematic review summarizes the results of studies investigating the toxicity of electromagnetic fields in insects. The main objective of this review is to weigh the evidence regarding detrimental effects on insects from the increasing technological infrastructure, with a particular focus on power lines and the cellular network. The next generation of mobile communication technologies, 5G, is being deployed - without having been tested in respect of potential toxic effects. With humanity's quest for pervasiveness of technology, even modest effects of electromagnetic fields on organisms could eventually reach a saturation level that can no longer be ignored. An overview of reported effects and biological mechanisms of exposure to electromagnetic fields, which addresses new findings in cell biology, is included. Biological effects of non-thermal EMF on insects are clearly proven in the laboratory, but only partly in the field, thus the wider ecological implications are still unknown. There is a need for more field studies, but extrapolating from the laboratory, as is common practice in ecotoxicology, already warrants increasing the threat level of environmental EMF impact on insects.

Excerpt

Looking back at the history of science, it seems that adverse effects have frequently been reported early on, but mostly been ignored – e.g. in the cases of asbestos, lead and cigarettes. It has typically taken decades to understand the mechanisms of toxicity and for the official position to shift. The European Environment Agency EEA has produced several reports on this topic under the title “Late lessons from early warnings” [146, 147].

Thirty-six of the fifty-five HF-EMF studies reported in this review used field strengths lower than 6 V/m (∼100 mW/m2), and 31 of these 36 studies (86 %) nevertheless found statistically significant adverse effects, starting at about 2 V/m and peaking around 6 V/m. This is below the regulatory thresholds established by the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP) (41 V/m, or 61 V/m above 2 GHz), and even below the particularly stringent installation limits only found in a handful of countries [94]. (The installation limit is measured where people can stay for long periods of time, i.e. homes, schools, working places and playgrounds for kids.)

Panagopoulos et al. detected a bioactive window at a distance of 20–30 cm from GSM mobile phones, where the power density equaled 100 mW/m2 (∼6 V/m), and where toxic effects in Drosophila are already observed after a 1-min exposure. These results have been replicated several times [148], [149], [150]. If this is generally true for insects, the limit for toxic effects would be 100 times below the current ICNIRP limit (10 W/m2 or 61 V/m), which protects only against thermal effects (in humans), and possibly 1,000 times lower than current limits for chronic exposure, i.e. 10 mW/m2 or 2 V/m (all comparisons based on power densities, i.e. energy per surface area units) [94]. A recent study found significant effects on gene transcription and chromosomal abnormalities using a WiFi signal at 4.8 mW/m2 or 1.35 V/m in Drosophila exposed for 9 days [145]. These findings of biological effects in insects starting at around 2 V/m imply that existing standards would have to be revised and made more stringent, to include nature protection/wild-life concerns.

Current ambient power densities are generally still below 10 or 100 mW/m2 (i.e. 2 or 6 V/m). A recent study measured values of 0.17–0.53 V/m in the field (0.1–0.8 mW/m2) [101]. Values mainly in the range of 0.5–1 V/m were found around schools in Crete [151]. Nationwide measurements of the National Observatory of electromagnetic fields (NOEF) in Greece found average values higher than 1 V/m in 55 % of sites, and values greater than 2 V/m in 20 % of measurement sites [152]. A recent review lists power densities ranging from 0.23 V/m in Swiss residential areas to 1.85 V/m in an Australian university neighborhood [86]. In urban hot spots (UK), a maximum of 150 mW/m2 (7.5 V/m) and an average of 25 mW/m2 (3.3 V/m) were measured (including WiFi) [153]. The French “Agence nationale des fréquences” (ANFR) found an average of 1.17 V/m at 1,300 5G base stations, and the authors expect a 20 % increase in the next years [154]. In Belgium, Italy, Switzerland, Russia and China, the installation limit is 6 V/m (100 mW/m2) for mobile telephony base stations, whereas Germany, the UK, the USA and many other countries adhere to the much higher ICNIRP limits [94, 155]. The ICNIRP limits have recently been questioned, since they are based on findings from more than 20 years ago, and their assumptions have been proven false [156]. Furthermore, the ICNIRP limits are designed to protect humans and have not been tested as to their adequacy in protecting wildlife and insects [157].

--
Low-level EMF effects on wildlife and plants: 
What research tells us about an ecosystem approach

Levitt BB, Lai HC and Manville AM II. (2022) Low-level EMF effects on wildlife and plants: What research tells us about an ecosystem approach. Front. Public Health 10:1000840. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2022.1000840.

Abstract

There is enough evidence to indicate we may be damaging non-human species at ecosystem and biosphere levels across all taxa from rising background levels of anthropogenic non-ionizing electromagnetic fields (EMF) from 0 Hz to 300 GHz. The focus of this Perspective paper is on the unique physiology of non-human species, their extraordinary sensitivity to both natural and anthropogenic EMF, and the likelihood that artificial EMF in the static, extremely low frequency (ELF) and radiofrequency (RF) ranges of the non-ionizing electromagnetic spectrum are capable at very low intensities of adversely affecting both fauna and flora in all species studied. Any existing exposure standards are for humans only; wildlife is unprotected, including within the safety margins of existing guidelines, which are inappropriate for trans-species sensitivities and different non-human physiology. Mechanistic, genotoxic, and potential ecosystem effects are discussed.

Excerpt

Radiofrequency radiation is a form of energetic air pollution and should be regulated as such (25). U.S. law (130) [42 USC § 7602 (g)] defines air pollution as:

“The term “air pollutant” means any air pollution agent or combination of such agents, including any physical, chemical, biological, radioactive (including source material, special nuclear material, and byproduct material) substance or matter which is emitted into or otherwise enters the ambient air. Such term includes any precursors to the formation of any air pollutant, to the extent the Administrator has identified such precursor or precursors for the particular purpose for which the term “air pollutant” is used.”

Unlike classic chemical toxicology pollutants in which a culprit can typically be identified and quantified, RFR may function as a “process” pollutant in the air not unlike how endocrine disruptors function in food and water in which the stressor causes a cascade of unpredictable systemic effects. The stimulus in the RFR analogy would be physical/energetic rather than chemical.

Long-term chronic low-level EMF exposure guidelines, which do not now exist, should be set accordingly for wildlife; mitigation techniques where possible should be developed; full environmental reviews should be conducted prior to the licensing/buildout of major new technologies like 5G; and environmental laws/regulations should be strictly enforced (25). We have a long over-due obligation to consider potential consequences to other species from our current unchecked technophoria—an obligation we have thus far not considered before species go extinct. In the views of these authors, the evidence requiring action is clear.

Open access paper: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpubh.2022.1000840

--

Sep 26, 2021

The Effects of Non-Ionizing Electromagnetic Fields on Flora and Fauna 
(Levitt, Lai, and Manville) 

The journal, Reviews on Environmental Health, just published the final part of a three-part monograph that examines the effects of non-ionizing electromagnetic fields (EMF), including wireless radiation from cell towers and EMF from power lines, on flora and fauna. This 150-page tome (plus supplements) written by B. Blake Levitt, Henry Lai, and Albert Manville cites more than 1,200 references.

B. Blake Levitt, an award-winning journalist/author and former contributor to the New York Times, has specialized in medical and science writing for over three decades. Since the late 1970's, she has researched the biological effects of nonionizing radiation. Henry Lai is a scientist and bioengineering Professor Emeritus at the University of Washington and former Editor-in-Chief of Electromagnetic Biology and Medicine. Dr. Lai is best known for his research published in 1995 which concluded that low-level microwave radiation caused DNA damage in rat brains. Albert Manville is a retired branch manager and senior wildlife biologist in the Division of Migratory Bird Management at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Dr. Manville has served as an adjunct professor and lecturer for more than two decades at Johns Hopkins University where he has taught field classes in ecology, conservation biology, and wildlife management.

The abstracts and excerpts from this three-part monograph appear below. 

Effects of non-ionizing electromagnetic fields on flora and fauna, part 1. 
Rising ambient EMF levels in the environment
 
B. Blake Levitt, Henry C. Lai, Albert M. Manville. Effects of non-ionizing electromagnetic fields on flora and fauna, part 1. Rising ambient EMF levels in the environment.  Rev Environ Health. 2021 May 27. doi: 10.1515/reveh-2021-0026.

Abstract

Ambient levels of electromagnetic fields (EMF) have risen sharply in the last 80 years, creating a novel energetic exposure that previously did not exist. Most recent decades have seen exponential increases in nearly all environments, including rural/remote areas and lower atmospheric regions. Because of unique physiologies, some species of flora and fauna are sensitive to exogenous EMF in ways that may surpass human reactivity. There is limited, but comprehensive, baseline data in the U.S. from the 1980s against which to compare significant new surveys from different countries. This now provides broader and more precise data on potential transient and chronic exposures to wildlife and habitats. Biological effects have been seen broadly across all taxa and frequencies at vanishingly low intensities comparable to today’s ambient exposures. Broad wildlife effects have been seen on orientation and migration, food finding, reproduction, mating, nest and den building, territorial maintenance and defense, and longevity and survivorship. Cyto- and geno-toxic effects have been observed. The above issues are explored in three consecutive parts: Part 1 questions today’s ambient EMF capabilities to adversely affect wildlife, with more urgency regarding 5G technologies. Part 2 explores natural and man-made fields, animal magnetoreception mechanisms, and pertinent studies to all wildlife kingdoms. Part 3 examines current exposure standards, applicable laws, and future directions. It is time to recognize ambient EMF as a novel form of pollution and develop rules at regulatory agencies that designate air as ‘habitat’ so EMF can be regulated like other pollutants. Wildlife loss is often unseen and undocumented until tipping points are reached. Long-term chronic low-level EMF exposure standards, which do not now exist, should be set accordingly for wildlife, and environmental laws should be strictly enforced.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34047144/

Conclusion

Ambient background levels of EMF have risen sharply in the last four decades, creating a novel energetic exposure that previously did not exist at the Earth’s surface, lower atmospheric levels, or underwater environments. Recent decades have seen exponential increases in nearly all environments, including remote regions. There is comprehensive but outdated baseline data from the 1980s against which to compare significant new surveys from other countries which found increasing RFR levels in urban, suburban and remote areas, primarily from cell infrastructure/phone/WiFi exposures. One indicative comparison of similar sites between 1980 and today found a 70-fold (7,000%) increase in ambient RFR [149]. The increased infrastructure required for 5G networks will widely infuse the environment with new atypical exposures, as are increasing satellite systems communicating with ground-based civilian networks. The new information provides broader perspective with more precise data on both potential transient and chronic exposures to wildlife and habitats. Biological effects have been seen broadly across all taxa at vanishingly low intensities comparable to today’s ambient exposures as examined in Part 2. The major question presented in Part 1 was whether increasing anthropogenic environmental EMF can cause biological effects in wildlife that may become more urgent with 5G technologies, in addition to concerns over potentially more lenient allowances being considered by major standards-setting committees at FCC and ICNIRP (examined in Part 3). There are unique signaling characteristics inherent to 5G transmission as currently designed of particular concern to non-human species. Background levels continue to rise but no one is studying cumulative effects to nonhuman species.

379 references.

--

Effects of non-ionizing electromagnetic fields on flora and fauna, Part 2 impacts: 
how species interact with natural and man-made EMF

B Blake Levitt, Henry C Lai, Albert M Manville. Effects of non-ionizing electromagnetic fields on flora and fauna, Part 2 impacts: how species interact with natural and man-made EMF. Rev Environ Health. 2021 Jul 8. doi:10.1515/reveh-2021-0050.

Abstract

Ambient levels of nonionizing electromagnetic fields (EMF) have risen sharply in the last five decades to become a ubiquitous, continuous, biologically active environmental pollutant, even in rural and remote areas. Many species of flora and fauna, because of unique physiologies and habitats, are sensitive to exogenous EMF in ways that surpass human reactivity. This can lead to complex endogenous reactions that are highly variable, largely unseen, and a possible contributing factor in species extinctions, sometimes localized. Non-human magnetoreception mechanisms are explored. Numerous studies across all frequencies and taxa indicate that current low-level anthropogenic EMF can have myriad adverse and synergistic effects, including on orientation and migration, food finding, reproduction, mating, nest and den building, territorial maintenance and defense, and on vitality, longevity and survivorship itself. Effects have been observed in mammals such as bats, cervids, cetaceans, and pinnipeds among others, and on birds, insects, amphibians, reptiles, microbes and many species of flora. Cyto- and geno-toxic effects have long been observed in laboratory research on animal models that can be extrapolated to wildlife. Unusual multi-system mechanisms can come into play with non-human species - including in aquatic environments - that rely on the Earth's natural geomagnetic fields for critical life-sustaining information. Part 2 of this 3-part series includes four online supplement tables of effects seen in animals from both ELF and RFR at vanishingly low intensities. Taken as a whole, this indicates enough information to raise concerns about ambient exposures to nonionizing radiation at ecosystem levels. Wildlife loss is often unseen and undocumented until tipping points are reached. It is time to recognize ambient EMF as a novel form of pollution and develop rules at regulatory agencies that designate air as 'habitat' so EMF can be regulated like other pollutants. Long-term chronic low-level EMF exposure standards, which do not now exist, should be set accordingly for wildlife, and environmental laws should be strictly enforced - a subject explored in Part 3.


Conclusion

Effects from both natural and man-made EMF over a wide range of frequencies, intensities, wave forms, and signaling characteristics have been observed in all species of animals and plants investigated. The database is now voluminous with in vitro, in vivo, and field studies from which to extrapolate. The majority of studies have found biological effects at both high and low-intensity man-made exposures, many with implications for wildlife health and viability. It is clear that ambient environmental levels are biologically active in all non-human species which can have unique physiological mechanisms that require natural geomagnetic information for their life’s most important activities. Sensitive magnetoreception allows living organisms, including plants, to detect small variations in environmental EMF and react immediately as well as over the long term, but it can also make some organisms exquisitely vulnerable to man-made fields. Anthropogenic EMF may be contributing more than we currently realize to species’ diminishment and extinction. Exposures continue to escalate without understanding EMF as a potential causative and/or co-factorial agent. It is time to recognize ambient EMF as a potential novel stressor to other species, design technology to reduce exposures to as low as reasonably achievable, keep systems wired as much as possible to reduce ambient RFR, and create laws accordingly — a subject explored more thoroughly in Part 3.


675 references.

--

Effects of non-ionizing electromagnetic fields on flora and fauna, Part 3. 
Exposure standards, public policy, laws, and future directions

B. Blake Levitt, Henry C. Lai, Albert M. Manville. Effects of non-ionizing electromagnetic fields on flora and fauna, Part 3. Exposure standards, public policy, laws, and future directions. Rev Environ Health. 2021 Sep 27. doi: 10.1515/reveh-2021-0083.

Abstract

Due to the continuous rising ambient levels of nonionizing electromagnetic fields (EMFs) used in modern societies—primarily from wireless technologies—that have now become a ubiquitous biologically active environmental pollutant, a new vision on how to regulate such exposures for non-human species at the ecosystem level is needed. Government standards adopted for human exposures are examined for applicability to wildlife. Existing environmental laws, such as the National Environmental Policy Act and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act in the U.S. and others used in Canada and throughout Europe, should be strengthened and enforced. New laws should be written to accommodate the ever-increasing EMF exposures. Radiofrequency radiation exposure standards that have been adopted by worldwide agencies and governments warrant more stringent controls given the new and unusual signaling characteristics used in 5G technology. No such standards take wildlife into consideration. Many species of flora and fauna, because of distinctive physiologies, have been found sensitive to exogenous EMF in ways that surpass human reactivity. Such exposures may now be capable of affecting endogenous bioelectric states in some species. Numerous studies across all frequencies and taxa indicate that low-level EMF exposures have numerous adverse effects, including on orientation, migration, food finding, reproduction, mating, nest and den building, territorial maintenance, defense, vitality, longevity, and survivorship. Cyto- and geno-toxic effects have long been observed. It is time to recognize ambient EMF as a novel form of pollution and develop rules at regulatory agencies that designate air as ‘habitat’ so EMF can be regulated like other pollutants. Wildlife loss is often unseen and undocumented until tipping points are reached. A robust dialog regarding technology’s high-impact role in the nascent field of electroecology needs to commence. Long-term chronic low-level EMF exposure standards should be set accordingly for wildlife, including, but not limited to, the redesign of wireless devices, as well as infrastructure, in order to reduce the rising ambient levels (explored in Part 1). Possible environmental approaches are discussed. This is Part 3 of a three-part series.

Excerpts

Introduction

This is Part 3 and concludes a three-part series on electromagnetic field (EMF) effects to wildlife.

Part 1 focused on measurements of rising background levels in urban, suburban, rural, and deep forested areas as well as from satellites. Discussed were different physics models used to determine safety and their appropriateness to current exposures. The unusual signaling characteristics and unique potential biological effects from 5G were explored. The online edition of Part 1 contains a Supplement Table of measured global ambient levels.

Part 2 is an in-depth review of species extinctions, exceptional non-human magnetoreception capabilities, and other species’ known reactions to anthropogenic EMF exposures as studied in laboratories and in the field. All animal kingdoms are included and clear vulnerabilities are seen. Part 2 contains four Supplement Tables of extensive low-level studies across all taxa, including ELF/RFR genotoxic effects.

Part 3 discusses current exposure standards, existing federal, and international laws that should be enforced but often are not, and concludes with a detailed discussion of aeroecology—the concept of defining air as habitat that would serve to protect many, though not all, vulnerable species today.

Some solutions

Existing environmental laws in the U.S., Canada, and throughout Europe should be enforced. For example, in the U.S., NEPA and its EISs should be required each time a new broadly polluting EMF technology like 5G is introduced, not as the current policy is being interpreted through “CatEx” or simple dismissal. EISs should be required for all new technologies that create pervasive ambient EMF such as ‘smart’ grid/metering, Distributed Antenna Systems (DAS), small cell networks, and the 5G “Internet of Things.” Where wildlife species are affected, systems and networks that currently meet radiation levels for CatEx (and are therefore exempt from review) should be required to develop/implement NEPA and EIS reviews for cumulative exposures to wildlife from multi-transmission sources.

Efforts should begin to develop acceptable exposure and emissions standards for wildlife, which today do not exist. Setting actual exposure standards for wildlife will be an enormous challenge, and for some species there may be no safe thresholds, especially with 5G and MMW. We may simply need to back away from many wireless technologies altogether, especially the densification of infrastructure, and refocus on developing better dedicated wired systems in urban, suburban and rural areas. Environmentally sensitive wilderness areas should be considered off limits for wireless infrastructure. Once air is seen as ‘habitat,’ there may come a time when a cell phone call voluntarily not made will be understood as removing something detrimental from air’s waste-stream, the way we now see plastic bags regarding terrestrial/aquatic pollution.

There are some reasonably simple things that can be done in the ELF ranges that would benefit insect, bird, and many wild mammal and ruminant species. For example, high-tension electric utility corridors can be built or changed to cancel magnetic fields with different wiring configurations. This is already widely done in the industry for other reasons but it also coincidentally eliminates at the source at least the magnetic field component for wildlife. There are other approaches too but further discussion is beyond the scope of this paper.

Research into the long-term, low-level ambient exposures to humans and wildlife is imperative given the picture that is emerging. There is a likelihood that low-level ambient EMF is a factor, or co-factor, in some of the adverse environmental effects we witness today—many previously discussed in this series of papers. There is currently no research in any industrialized country that looks to the broader implications to all flora and fauna from these rising background levels, even as effects to individual species are observed. This is an important, emerging environmental issue that must be addressed.

Conclusions

In this broad three-part review, we sought to clarify if rising ambient levels of EMF were within the range of effects observed in in vitro, in vivo, and field studies in all animal phyla thus far investigated. We further discussed mechanisms pertinent to different animal physiology, behavior, and unique environments. The intention was to determine if current levels have the ability to impact wildlife species according to current studies. The amount of papers that find effects at today’s EMF levels to myriad species is robust. Some unusual patterns did emerge, including broadly in flora that react beneficially to static EMF but adversely to AC-ELF and especially to RFR.

There is a very large database supporting the hypothesis that effects occur in unpredictable ways in numerous species in all representative taxa from modern ambient exposures. Associations are strong enough to warrant caution. New enlightened public policies are needed, as well as existing laws enforced, reflecting a broader understanding of non-human species’ interactions with environmental EMF. Emerging areas, such as aeroecology, help define airspace as habitat and bring better awareness of challenges faced by aerial species—including animals and plants. But we are in the nascent stages of understanding the full complexity and detailed components of electroecology—the larger category of how technology affects all biology and ecosystems.

Historically, control over the realm of nonionizing radiation has been the purview of the physics and engineering communities. It is time that the more appropriate branches of biological science, specializing in living systems, stepped up to fill in larger perspectives and more accurate knowledge. We need to task our technology sector engineers to create safer products and networks with an emphasis on wired systems, and to keep all EMF exposures as low as reasonably achievable.

Corresponding author: B. Blake Levitt, P.O. Box 2014, New Preston, CT 06777, USA, E-mail: 
aeroecology; electroecology; International Council on Non-ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP); Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA); National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA); non-ionizing electromagnetic fields (EMFs); radiofrequency radiation (RFR); rising ambient levels; U.S. Federal Communications Commission (FCC)

162 references.


==

Electromagnetic radiation as an emerging driver factor for the decline of insects

Alfonso Balmori. Electromagnetic radiation as an emerging driver factor for the decline of insects. Sci Total Environ. Available online 28 January 2021, 144913. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.

Highlights

• Biodiversity of insects is threatened worldwide
• This reductions is mainly attributed to agricultural practice and pesticide use
• There is sufficient evidence on the damage caused by electromagnetic radiation
• Electromagnetic radiation may be a complementary driver in this decline
• The precautionary principle should be applied before any new deployment (e.g. 5G)

Abstract

The biodiversity of insects is threatened worldwide. Numerous studies have reported the serious decline in insects that has occurred in recent decades. The same is happening with the important group of pollinators, with an essential utility for pollination of crops. Loss of insect diversity and abundance is expected to provoke cascading effects on food webs and ecosystem services. Many authors point out that reductions in insect abundance must be attributed mainly to agricultural practices and pesticide use. On the other hand, evidence for the effects of non-thermal microwave radiation on insects has been known for at least 50 years. The review carried out in this study shows that electromagnetic radiation should be considered seriously as a complementary driver for the dramatic decline in insects, acting in synergy with agricultural intensification, pesticides, invasive species and climate change. The extent that anthropogenic electromagnetic radiation represents a significant threat to insect pollinators is unresolved and plausible. For these reasons, and taking into account the benefits they provide to nature and humankind, the precautionary principle should be applied before any new deployment (such 5G) is considered.


--




Effects of Non-Ionizing Electromagnetic Pollution on Invertebrates, Including Pollinators Such as Honey Bees: What We Know, What We Don’t Know, and What We Need to Know

Friesen M, Havas M. 2020. Effects of Non-Ionizing Electromagnetic Pollution on Invertebrates, Including Pollinators Such as Honey Bees: What We Know, What We Don’t Know, and What We Need to Know.” Pages 127-138 In Working Landscapes. Proceedings of the 12th Prairie Conservation and Endangered Species Conference, February 2019, Winnipeg, Manitoba. Edited by D. Danyluk. Critical Wildlife Habitat Program, Winnipeg, Manitoba. http://pcesc.ca/media/45404/final-2019-pcesc-proceedings.pdf.

Abstract

Invertebrates, including pollinators such as honey bees, can be adversely affected by non-ionizing electromagnetic radiation (EMR). Sources contributing to common environmental EMR exposures include antennae (cell phone, broadcast, and radar), communications satellites, and power lines. Adverse biochemical changes and disorientation have been reported for honey bees and other invertebrates. Field studies have reported changes in abundance and composition of “key pollinator groups” (wild bees, hoverflies, bee flies, beetles, and wasps) that have been attributed to emissions from telecommunications towers. We take a close look at the biological effects on invertebrates of EMR reported in the scientific literature and a general look at evidence from studies on plants, birds, humans, and other animals (domestic, laboratory, wild). We discuss possible implications of excessive electromagnetic pollution on ecosystems and identify knowledge gaps and what we need to know before more electromagnetic pollution is added to the environment, especially in the form of 5G.

Introduction

Invertebrates (animals without backbones) are major components of most ecosystems. Insects are key to the integrity of many ecosystems in many roles including as pollinators. Honey bees play a role in pollination of domestic as well as wild plants and are often used as bio-indicator species and as a “model” to examine environmental problems. The global decline of pollinators is of grave concern and efforts are being made to identify the reasons (Potts et al. 2010; Sánchez-Bayo and Wyckhuys 2019). One factor not widely considered is the possible role of anthropogenic electromagnetic radiation (EMR).

Electromagnetic fields (EMFs) are invisible electric and magnetic fields of force. All living organisms have evolved in Earth’s natural EMFs and depend on them to live. Natural sources include Earth’s static magnetic field, and static electricity, including differences in charges among clouds and the earth that can lead to lightning. Electromagnetic radiation (EMR) originates when fields change.

Anthropogenic (human-made, artificial) EMR sources are sometimes referred to as electromagnetic pollution or electrosmog. The main frequency ranges of interest in this article are: 1) extremely low frequencies (ELF) of 50/60 to 90 Hz that emanate from sources such as power lines and building wiring; and 2) radiofrequency radiation (RFR) of 700 MHz to 6 GHz, commonly used for devices such as cell phones, radio and television, and their supporting infrastructure, e.g., cell towers, antennae on buildings, and orbiting communications satellites. Also discussed are frequencies currently being developed and deployed above 6 GHz for 5G (5th Generation) for faster and more pervasive connectivity, including the “Internet of Things”.


--

Risk to pollinators from anthropogenic electro-magnetic radiation: Evidence and knowledge gaps

Vanbergen AJ, Potts SG, Vian A, Malkemper EP, Young J, Tscheulin T. Risk to pollinators from anthropogenic electro-magnetic radiation (EMR): Evidence and knowledge gaps. Sci Total Environ. 2019 Aug 7;695:133833. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.133833.

Highlights

• Anthropogenic electromagnetic radiation (light, radiofrequency) is perceived to threaten pollinators and biodiversity.
• Potential risks are artificial light at night (ALAN) and anthropogenic radiofrequency electromagnetic radiation (AREMR).
• We assessed the quantity and quality of evidence, and the level of consensus, to distil key messages for science and policy.
• ALAN can alter pollinator communities and functions, although this remains to be well established.
• Evidence of AREMR impacts is inconclusive due to a lack of high quality, field-realistic studies.
• Whether pollinators and pollination face a threat from the spread of ALAN or AREMR remains a major knowledge gap.

Abstract

Worldwide urbanisation and use of mobile and wireless technologies (5G, Internet of Things) is leading to the proliferation of anthropogenic electromagnetic radiation (EMR) and campaigning voices continue to call for the risk to human health and wildlife to be recognised. Pollinators provide many benefits to nature and humankind, but face multiple anthropogenic threats. Here, we assess whether artificial light at night (ALAN) and anthropogenic radiofrequency electromagnetic radiation (AREMR), such as used in wireless technologies (4G, 5G) or emitted from power lines, represent an additional and growing threat to pollinators. A lack of high quality scientific studies means that knowledge of the risk to pollinators from anthropogenic EMR is either inconclusive, unresolved, or only partly established. A handful of studies provide evidence that ALAN can alter pollinator communities, pollination and fruit set. Laboratory experiments provide some, albeit variable, evidence that the honey bee Apis mellifera and other invertebrates can detect EMR, potentially using it for orientation or navigation, but they do not provide evidence that AREMR affects insect behaviour in ecosystems. Scientifically robust evidence of AREMR impacts on abundance or diversity of pollinators (or other invertebrates) are limited to a single study reporting positive and negative effects depending on the pollinator group and geographical location. Therefore, whether anthropogenic EMR (ALAN or AREMR) poses a significant threat to insect pollinators and the benefits they provide to ecosystems and humanity remains to be established.



Oct 31, 2018

EKLIPSE Project: Electromagnetic fields threaten wildlife

Implications for 5G deployment

A new report found that electromagnetic fields emitted by power lines, Wi-Fi, broadcast and cell towers pose a “credible” threat to wildlife, and that 5G (fifth generation cellular technology) could cause greater harm.

The analysis of 97 peer-reviewed studies by the EKLIPSE project concluded that electromagnetic radiation (EMR) is a potential risk to insect and bird orientation and to plant health.

The report concluded that: 
  • EMR represents a potential risk to the orientation or movement of invertebrates and may affect insect behavior and reproduction;
  • bird orientation can be disrupted by weak magnetic fields in the radiofrequency range, and the same may be true for other vertebrates including mammals; and
  • EMR exposure may affect plant metabolism due to production of reactive oxygen species often resulting in reduced plant growth.
  • Moreover, there is “an urgent need to strengthen the scientific basis of the knowledge on EMR and their potential impacts on wildlife.”
The review was conducted by a multidisciplinary, expert steering group composed of four biologists/ecologists who specialized in different taxonomic groups, and two physicists who study electromagnetic fields. This technical report represents the first step in an analysis of currently available knowledge and future research needs.

The reviewers pointed out the need for more high quality research. They rated the quality of 82 studies--56 had good to excellent biologic or ecologic quality, and 39 had good to excellent technical quality.

EKLIPSE (Establishing a European Knowledge and Learning Mechanism to Improve the Policy-Science-Society Interface on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services) is funded by the European Union to answer requests from policy makers and other societal actors on biodiversity-related issues.

For more information about the EKLIPSE conference held January 22-25, 2018, including slides and video, see: http://www.eklipse-mechanism.eu/emr_conference.

References

Malkemper EP, Tscheulin T, VanBergen AJ, Vian A, Balian E, Goudeseune L (2018). The impacts of artificial Electromagnetic Radiation on wildlife (flora and fauna). Current knowledge overview: a background document to the web conference. A report of the EKLIPSE project. http://bit.ly/Eklipseoverview

Goudeseune L, Balian E, Ventocilla J (2018). The impacts of artificial Electromagnetic Radiation on wildlife (flora and fauna). Report of the web conference. A report of the EKLIPSE project. http://bit.ly/EKLIPSEconfreport

Also see:

--

The EKLIPSE review was conducted at the request of Buglife, the only European organization devoted to the conservation of invertebrates. Invertebrates are vitally important to humans and other life forms which could not survive without them; yet, thousands of species are declining, and many are heading towards extinction. 

According to a news story in The Telegraph:

“… the charity Buglife warned that despite good evidence of the harms there was little research ongoing to assess the impact, or apply pollution limits.

The charity said ‘serious impacts on the environment could not be ruled out’ and called for 5G transmitters to be placed away from street lights, which attract insects, or areas where they could harm wildlife.

Matt Shardlow, CEO of Buglife said: ‘We apply limits to all types of pollution to protect the habitability of our environment, but as yet, even in Europe, the safe limits of electromagnetic radiation have not been determined, let alone applied.

There is a credible risk that 5G could impact significantly on wildlife, and that placing transmitters on LED street lamps, which attract nocturnal insects such as moths increases exposure and thereby risk.

Therefore we call for all 5G pilots to include detailed studies of their influence and impacts on wildlife, and for the results of those studies to be made public.’

Buglife called for 5G transmitters to be moved away from street lights where insects are drawn.

As of March, 237 scientists have signed an appeal to the United Nations asking them to take the risks posed by electromagnetic radiation more seriously.”


Additional Resources (Updated August 14, 2021)

Aikaterina L, Stefi AL, Vassilacopoulou D, Margaritis LH, Christodoulakis NS. Oxidative stress and an animal neurotransmitter synthesizing enzyme in the leaves of wild growing myrtle after exposure to GSM radiation. Flora. 243:67-76. June 2018. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.flora.2018.04.006


Granger J, Walkowicz L, Fitak R, Johnsen S. Gray whales strand more often on days with increased levels of atmospheric radio-frequency noise. Curr Biol. 2020 Feb 24;30(4):R155-R156. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32097638

Lupi D, Mesiano MP, Adani A, Benocci R, Giacchini R, Parenti P, Zambon G, Lavazza A, Boniotti MB, Bassi S, Colombo M, Tremolada P. 2021. Combined Effects of Pesticides and Electromagnetic-Fields on Honeybees: Multi-Stress Exposure. Insects. 12(8):716. doi: 10.3390/insects12080716. https://www.mdpi.com/2075-4450/12/8/716

Nyqvist D, Durif C, Johnsen MG, De Jong K, Forland TN, Sivle LD. Electric and magnetic senses in marine animals, and potential behavioral effects of electromagnetic surveys. Mar Environ Res. 2020 Mar;155:104888. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32072990

Panagopoulos DJ, Balmori A, Chrousos GP. On the biophysical mechanism of sensing upcoming earthquakes by animals. Sci Total Environ. 2020 Jan 29;717:136989. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32070887

Russell, C. Wireless Silent Spring. Santa Clara County Medical Association Bulletin. Oct 2018. http://www.sccma-mcms.org/Portals/19/SilentSpringAticle_color_pr2.pdf

Thursday, November 30, 2023

Mobilize: A Film About Cell Phone Radiation



Mobilize: A Film About Cell Phone Radiation is a 
feature-length documentary that explores the long-term health effects from cell phone radiation including cancer and infertility. The film examines scientific research, follows state and national legislative efforts, and illuminates the influence that technology companies have on public health. 

Mobilize features interviews with scientists, doctors, politicians, cancer patients, and technology experts. The film was selected as the best documentary film at the California Independent Film Festival in 2014.

Release date:  2014

Running time:  1:23:22

Cast:  Steve Aoki, Andrea Boland, Richard Branson, Otis Brawley, George W. Bush, David Carpenter, Raffi Cavoukian, Bill Clinton, Hilary Clinton, Steven Colbert, Anderson Cooper, Devra Davis, Cameron Diaz, Lady Gaga, Stanton Glantz, Al Gore, Janet Jackson, Steve Jobs, David Katz, Lenny Kravitz, Dennis Kucinich, Kevin Kunze, Mark Leno, Lawrence Lessig, Adam Levine, Eva Longoria, Eric Mar, Joel Moskowitz, Robert Nagourney, Gavin Newsom, Conan O'Brien, Barack Obama, Gwyneth Paltrow, Sarah Jessica Parker, Brad Pitt, Debbie Raphael, Jonathan Samet, Diane Sawyer, David Servan-Schreiber, Renee Sharp, Joe Simitian, Shepard Smith, Tony Strickland, Hugh Taylor, Ali Velshi, John Walls, Josh Wolf, Steve Wozniak, Ye, Leland Yee

Director:  Kevin Kunze

Producers:  Amir Zeev Kovacs, Kevin Kunze, Ellie Marks, Devra Davis, Joel Moskowitz

Writer:  Kevin Kunze


The film can be rented for $1.99 or purchased for $7.99 on Amazon Prime:  https://www.amazon.com/gp/video/detail/B07M639C2B

The DVD can be purchased through Amazon:  https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00M58FRQM/.

--

KPFA Interview 
of Joel Moskowitz about Mobilize on September 11, 2014.   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qgde8u9mBmw

KALW panel on Mobilize, Joel Moskowitz and Kevin Kunze. September 16, 2014. 
  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=01YB1ShpNWY

Note: I have no financial interest in the film.

Movie reviews
Mobilize: A Film about Cell Phone Radiation
Distributed by TDC Entertainment, 220 East 23rd St., Suite 405, New York, NY 10010
Produced by Devra Davis, Ellen Marks, and Joel Moskowitz
Directed by Kevin Kunze
DVD, color, 88 min.

General Adult
Health Care, Public Health, Sociology, Psychology, Telecommunications

Reviewed by Rodney Birch, Reference Librarian, George Fox University
Mobilize investigates the claims around the question of whether the radiation from cell phones is harmful to human health. While the question dates back to the early 1990s, it has been revived as a result of the World Health Organization has stated that, “the electromagnetic fields produced by mobile phones are . . . possibly carcinogenic to humans,” as well as an increasing number of scientific studies showing the effects of cell phone radiation on human health, personal claims, and our increasing dependence on these personal communication devices. The producers go beyond the hype to get to the root of the issue, often exposing inconsistencies in statements by the cell phone industry regarding the current research, and statements made by the Federal Communications Commission and public health organizations. The producers process the information gained through scientific research, Congressional Hearings, and interviews with cell phone industry executives, politicians, public health professionals, and other individuals to provide a balanced and thorough discussion and investigation. Other countries have created legislation around the public health concerns related to the radiation from cell phones. The producers of the film claim the U.S. is slower to adopt such legislation due to the lobbying efforts of the cell phone industry. One of the few cases mentioned is when the city of San Francisco adopted a policy regarding the health concern of cell phone radiation, the cell phone industry filed a lawsuit against the city. This film would be a useful resource for persons exploring the impact of technology on health and behavior, including sociology, psychology, health care and public health

 

Mobilize 3 1/2 stars (2014) 84 min. DVD: $19.98. ISBN: 978-1-939517-25-8.
What are the long-term health consequences from daily use of cellular phones? No one really knows, since widespread cell phone use is fairly new. Still, filmmaker Kevin Kunze’s documentary Mobilize makes a strong case that persuasive evidence has emerged regarding the potential for damage to the human body through heavy cell phone usage. Buried in the fine print of the manuals that accompany new cell phones are warnings about keeping the devices a short distance from a user’s head. But studies outlined here make it clear that such precautions aren’t enough: radiation from phones causes heat that, over time, can injure the brain, while a phone’s constant radio interactions with mobile device towers can alter brain chemistry. The problems don’t end there: cell phones carry a potential threat to pregnant women and their babies, and have been linked to cancer, low sperm count, and attention deficit disorder (the industry is also marketing to toddlers, assuring that future generations will be exposed to this radiation). Despite the concerns, Mobilize illustrates how the lobbying and legal powers of the telecommunications industry have been able to shut down any legislative or judicial attempts to curb emissions (or even educate consumers). An alarming documentary with unquestionably controversial findings, this is highly recommended. Aud: C, P. (T. Keogh)


Tuesday, November 7, 2023

Female Infertility & Cell Phone Radiation

Although we have considerable evidence that cell phone radiation damages sperm and is associated with male infertility, little attention has been paid to studying the effects of cell phone radiation on female infertility.* 

A study by Courtney Lynch and her colleagues found for women trying to get pregnant that stress as measured by the alpha-amylase levels in their saliva predicted whether they were successful. The researchers found that women with the highest levels of this enzyme in their saliva had a 29 percent lower probability of pregnancy compared to those with the lowest levels. 

Although this study did not examine electromagnetic field (EMF) exposure, earlier research published by Christoph Augner and his colleagues found that people who lived within 100 meters of cell phone towers had greater salivary alpha-amylase levels. In an experimental study, the researchers found that exposure to higher levels of GSM cell tower radiation increased the levels of this salivary enzyme. 

In a 2013 review paper, Nazıroğlu and colleagues examined research on the effects of Wi-Fi and mobile phone radiation on reproductive signaling pathways. They reported that this radiation is related to "oxidative stress and overproduction of free oxygen radicals in female and male infertility."  The authors concluded that "the role of EMR from mobile phones and wireless devices in female and male fertility should be investigated."

A 2023 systematic review and meta-analysis of six studies found that the risk of miscarriage was 1.69 times higher in pregnant women who were exposed to "high levels" of powerline and/or radio frequency EMF than the risk for those not exposed to higher levels of EMF.

References (Last update: 11/7/2023)

Electromagnetic Field Exposure and (Spontaneous) Abortion in Pregnant Women: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Irani M, Aradmehr M, Ghorbani M, Baghani R. Electromagnetic Field Exposure and Abortion in Pregnant Women: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Malays J Med Sci. 2023;30(5):70-80. doi:10.21315/mjms2023.30.5.6

Abstract

This study examined the effects of exposure to electromagnetic fields (EMF) on pregnancy and the risk of miscarriage. We performed a systematic search for relevant studies published to August 2021 in the medical databases of PubMed, CINAHL, Scopus, Web of Science, Google Scholar and Cochrane Library. The following key terms were used: ‘electromagnetic field,’ ‘mobile phones,’ ‘mobile phone base stations,’ ‘watching TV,’ ‘using Internet,’ ‘miscarriage,’ ‘abortions,’ ‘spontaneous abortion,’ ‘early abortion’ and ‘late abortion’. All case–control and cohort studies that investigated the effect of EMF exposure on the risk of miscarriage were included without any restriction of language or time. Statistical analyses were done using Comprehensive Meta-Analysis software (version 2.0). A random-effects model was performed to calculate the overall effect size. A primary search revealed a total of 982 relevant studies; six articles (N = 3,187 participants) met the inclusion criteria for the meta-analysis. The results of the random-effects meta-analysis indicated that EMF exposure had a significant effect on miscarriage: rate ratio (RR) = 1.699; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.121, 2.363 (P < 0.001); and heterogeneity (I2) = 84.55% (P < 0.001). The findings showed that pregnant women who were exposed to high levels of EMF had an increased risk of miscarriage.

Excerpts

This systematic review and meta-analysis study was performed to investigate the effects that exposure to EMF during pregnancy had on the risk of spontaneous abortion. Six articles were included in the meta-analysis; five studies confirmed the effect of exposure to electromagnetic waves on spontaneous abortion (25–30). The study by Abad et al. (27) indicated that, although women who were exposed to significant levels of electromagnetic waves had a high risk of miscarriage, the relationship was not confirmed by the Wald test. The lack of evidence may have been related to the small sample size of the study (27).

The present meta-analysis study showed that the risk of miscarriage in pregnant women who were exposed to EMF was 1.69 times higher than the risk for women who were not exposed. Ebadi et al. (31) showed that there was a significant relationship between exposure to low-frequency EMF (i.e. 3 Hz–3000 Hz) generated from sources in the home and the risk of miscarriage in pregnant women at < 14 weeks gestation. The researchers also found that the duration of mobile phone use during the day and the intervals between mobile phone use were associated with the risk of miscarriage (31).

... Different studies have reported conflicting results in terms of the duration of exposure and the risk of abortion. For example, Li et al. (28) found strong evidence that exposure to a magnetic field over 16 mG may be associated with a risk of miscarriage. Their study showed that the RR associated with a magnetic field exposure of 16 mG was 2.2 (95% CI: 1.2, 4.0). The researchers also showed that the risk of miscarriage from exposure to magnetic waves was greater in early pregnancy (< 10 weeks) because the foetus was more sensitive to environmental factors (28).

In their case–control study, Lee et al. (29) found that exposure to high and frequent magnetic fields increased the risk of abortion in pregnant women enrolled in a medical care system in Northern California. The researchers stated that the risk of abortion increased with exposures above the 50th percentile level in the environment (29). In another study, researchers looked at mobile phone use and the risk of abortion in two groups of women: the case group of women had a spontaneous abortion at < 14 weeks and the control group of women were > 14 weeks gestation. They found that the average duration of mobile phone contact during the day, the location of the phone when not in use, the use of the phone for other applications, the specific absorption rate (SAR) and the mean effective SAR were significantly different between the two groups (26).


--

The role of non-ionizing electromagnetic radiation on female fertility: A review

Pooja Jangid, Umesh Rai, Radhey Shyam Sharma, Rajeev Singh. The role of non-ionizing electromagnetic radiation on female fertility: A review. Int J Environ Health Res. 2022 Feb 8;1-16. doi: 10.1080/09603123.2022.2030676.

Abstract

With increasing technological developments, exposure to non-ionizing radiation has become unavoidable as people cannot escape from electromagnetic field sources, such as Wi-Fi, electric wires, microwave oven, radio, telecommunication, bluetooth devices, etc. These radiations can be associated with increased health problems of the users. This review aims to determine the effects of non-ionizing electromagnetic radiations on female fertility. To date, several in vitro and in vivo studies unveiled that exposure to non-ionizing radiations brings about harmful effects on oocytes, ovarian follicles, endometrial tissue, estrous cycle, reproductive endocrine hormones, developing embryo, and fetal development in animal models. Non-ionizing radiation also upsurges the free radical load in the uterus and ovary, which leads to inhibition of cell growth and DNA disruptions. In conclusion, non-ionizing electromagnetic radiation can cause alterations in both germ cells as well as in their nourishing environment and also affect other female reproductive parameters that might lead to infertility.

Conclusion

According to the findings of this review, it can be concluded that non-ionizing EMRs radiated from cell phones, laptops, bluetooth devices, microwave ovens, or wireless networks might have detrimental effects on female fertility. Non-ionizing radiation can have destructive effects on ovary and uterus, affecting several reproduction parameters in females, such as folliculogenesis, oocyte morphology, and differentiation, hormones, reproductive cycle, and could lead to DNA damage. These effects may lead to subfertility and infertility due to increased free radical load and oxidative stress in the ovaries and uterus generated by these radiations. However, the effect of non-ionizing radiation on human gamete vis-à-vis female fertility is still poorly understood. Also, the findings of a whole-body EMR exposure in the same animal do not anticipate the results of a local EMR exposure. As a result, the outcomes of whole-body EMR exposure in animals cannot be directly compared to the outcomes of local EMR exposure in humans while using cell phones. Unfortunately, specific frequency and SAR value that causes impairment in the reproductive parameters and the exact mechanism of EMR action are not known so far. Moreover, further investigations are required to elucidate the role of EMR from mobile phones, Wi-Fi, and other devices in female fertility. Lastly, it is the need of the hour to understand the exact mechanism of EMR action on female fertility, establish safe exposure limits, and overcome the radiation effects.

--

Nargess Moghadasi, Iraj Alimohammadi, Ali Safari Variani, Azadeh Ashtarinezhad. The Effect of Mobile Radiation on the Oxidative Stress Biomarkers in Pregnant Mice. J Family Reprod Health. 2021 Sep;15(3):172-178. doi: 10.18502/jfrh.v15i3.7134.

Abstract

Objective: Due to the growing use of communication instruments such as cell phones and wireless devices, there is growing public concern about possible harmful effects, especially in sensitive groups such as pregnant women. This study aimed to investigate the oxidative stress induced by exposure to 900 MHz mobile phone radiation and the effect of vitamin C intake on reducing possible changes in pregnant mice.

Materials and methods: Twenty-one pregnant mice were divided into three groups (control, mobile radiation-exposed, and mobile radiation plus with vitamin C intake co-exposed (200 mg /kg)). The mice in exposure groups were exposed to 900 MHz, 2 watts, and a power density of 0.045 μw /cm2 mobile radiation for eight hours/day for ten consecutive days. After five days of rest, MDA (Malondialdehyde), 8-OHdG (8-hydroxy-2' -deoxyguanosine), and TAC (Total Antioxidant Capacity) levels were measured in the blood of animals. The results were analyzed by SPSS.22.0 software.

Results: The results showed that exposure to mobile radiation increased MDA (P=0.002), and 8-OHdG (P=0.001) significantly and decreased Total Antioxidant Capacity in the exposed groups (P=0.001). Taking vitamin C inhibited the significant increase in MDA and 8-OHdG levels in exposed groups.

Conclusion: Although exposure to mobile radiation can cause oxidative stress in the blood of pregnant mice, vitamin C as an antioxidant can prevent it.


--

Fatehi D, Anjomshoa M, Mohammadi M, Seify M, Rostamzadeh A. Biological effects of cell-phone radiofrequency waves exposure on fertilization in mice; an in vivo and in vitro study. Middle East Fertility Society Journal, 23(2):148-153. June 2018.

Abstract

Increasing use of cell-phone is one of the most important risk factors for population health. We designed an experimental study aimed at evaluating the effects of cell-phone radiofrequency (RF) waves exposure on fertilization in mice. Two hundred male and female NMRI-mice were used. One hundred males divided in five groups (n = 20) as control and exposed groups. Those irradiated with cell-phone RF in “Standby-mode” 1, 5 and 10 h daily named groups II, III and IV; respectively. Group V irradiated with cell-phone on “Active-mode” one hour daily. After 30 days irradiation, 50 males and 50 females were kept 24 h to assess their embryos. Fifty males were scarified to evaluate both in vitro and in vivo parameters, and 50 females received PMSG & HCG for both quantitative and qualitative evaluation. Comparing groups III, IV and V with control-group showed significantly decreased in the number of two-cell embryos (p = .000); however, a significant increase was found in the number of dead embryos (p = .000). Furthermore, 5 h daily irradiation significantly decreased grade-A embryos (p = .015); while, it significantly increased grade-B, C and D embryos (p-values = 0.026, 0.007, 0.006; respectively). Moreover, comparing groups IV and V to control-group, significant increase was found in pregnancy duration (p = .005, p = .009; respectively). However, in the mentioned groups a significant decrease was seen in number of newborn mice (p = .001, p = .004; respectively). In conclusion our findings showed that the cell-phone radiation can affect development of embryos as well as the number of newborn and pregnancy duration in NMRI-mouse, which might be a significant cause of reproductive failure.


Open access paper: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1110569017301875

--

Shasin S, Singh SP, Chaturvedi CM. Mobile Phone (1800MHz) Radiation Impairs Female Reproduction in Mice, Mus musculus, through Stress Induced Inhibition of Ovarian and Uterine Activity. Reprod Toxicol. 2017 Aug 2.

Highlights

• Mice exposed to mobile phone radiation (MPR) in different operative modes. 
• Ovarian & uterine histopathology, steroidogenesis & stress parameters were checked. 
• Degenerative changes & reduced follicle count were observed in MPR exposed ovary. 
• MPR resulted significant decrease in ovarian steroidogenic proteins & sex steroids. 
• MPR induced oxidative & nitrosative stress impairs reproductive functions in mice.

Abstract

Present study investigated the long-term effects of mobile phone (1800MHz) radiation in stand-by, dialing and receiving modes on the female reproductive function (ovarian and uterine histo-architecture, and steroidogenesis) and stress responses (oxidative and nitrosative stress). We observed that mobile phone radiation induces significant elevation in ROS, NO, lipid peroxidation, total carbonyl content and serum corticosterone coupled with significant decrease in antioxidant enzymes in hypothalamus, ovary and uterus of mice. Compared to control group, exposed mice exhibited reduced number of developing and mature follicles as well as corpus lutea. Significantly decreased serum levels of pituitary gonadotrophins (LH, FSH), sex steroids (E2 and P4) and expression of SF-1, StAR, P-450scc, 3β-HSD, 17β-HSD, cytochrome P-450 aromatase, ER-α and ER-β were observed in all the exposed groups of mice, compared to control. These findings suggest that mobile phone radiation induces oxidative and nitrosative stress, which affects the reproductive performance of female mice.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28780396

Excerpts

Experimental group mice were exposed to non-thermal (for body as a whole) mobile phone radiation (1800 MHz) by using Nokia 100 (2G, GSM) dual-band mobile phones continuously for four months (3 h/day for 120 days) in different operative modes i.e., dialing (dialing was performed), receiving (dialing signals from D-group was received) and stand-by (mobile phone was kept in just switched on mode) modes. From D-group mobile phones, only dialing signals (and not speech signals) were sent to the mobile phones of R-group. Dialing signals on the mobile phones of R-group were received so that both D- and R-group animals were in continuous condition of connectivity for 1½ hrs, then after a very small break (∼10–15 s) again the dialing was initiated from the mobile phones of D-group and signals were received at the mobile phones of R-group and the continuity between the signal transmission and reception is maintained for another 1½ hrs. SB-group mice were kept beneath the “switched-on mobile phones continuously for 3 h. Before the start of exposure, silent profile with no vibration was set for the mobile phones of all groups. To neutralize the box related and other external constraints, one sham control group was taken into account in each study. The control group mice were subjected to sham exposure in the same mobile phone exposure set-up for same time each day but with the mobile phones in “switched-off condition. 

This study demonstrate the deleterious effects of long-term 1800 MHz mobile phone radiation exposure in different operative modes i.e. dialing (D), receiving (R) and stand-by (SB) modes on female reproduction. Present experimental findings clearly elucidate that mobile phone radiation has a negative impact on female reproductive system. Outcome of the study demonstrates that long-term mobile phone irradiation causes alteration in ovarian and uterine morphology, histoarchitecture and activity. Mobile phone irradiated mice ovary revealed less number of developing and mature follicles with few corpus lutea and increased number of atretic/degenerative follicles. Although marked changes were observed in all the three experimental groups, the effects were more pronounced and severe in cases of R- and SB-groups of mice.

Overall, our study clearly elucidates that the long-term 1800 MHz mobile phone exposure impairs female reproductive system possibly via inducing both oxidative and nitrosative stress. Our study also suggests that mobile phone exposure produces deleterious effect on hypothalamus, ovary and uterus, and thus affects the ovarian and uterine activity and histoarchitecture adversely. Mobile phone radiation may result in ovarian and uterine dysfunction by increasing ROS and RNS production and disturbing antioxidant status. Oxidative and nitrosative stress created at the hypothalamus and peripheral level (ovary and uterus) as a consequence of long-term mobile phone exposure may severely reduce both steroidogenesis and folliculogenesis in the ovary as well as the structural and functional status of the uterus. 

These results led us to conclude that chronic exposure to long-term mobile phone radiation may severely affect the ovarian and uterine activity of female mice and thus may lead to infertility. The effects were more pronounced/deleterious in stand-by and receiving conditions. Further, the results of this study performed on the rodent model, Mus musculus, may not be extrapolated to human being as the SAR value delivered to human at the ovary or uterus end will be much less than (and not comparable to) the value for the rodent at the desired site due to greater depth of the site from the skin surface of human being, assuming large body size ratio between two type of subjects, i.e., human being and rodent. However, if the human being is exposed to mobile phone radiation over longer duration, there may be the possibility of the radiation producing similar effect on human female reproductive system, on the assumption, that the total energy absorbed in the two cases is of same order of magnitude. Therefore, we anticipate that, these findings will improve our understanding of the etiology of female infertility due to heavy mobile phone usage. 

The rise in female infertility problems may be, at least in part, due to a contribution from mobile phone radiation exposure to females. Hence, we anticipate that the outcome of the present study will not only contribute in framing of proper guidelines for safer use of mobile phone, which is an unavoidable device of present life style but may also assist in deciding the threshold limits to minimize adverse effects of the long term exposure to mobile phone radiations for females. However, further investigation is required in humans and non-human primates to determine whether the risks are similar and to establish safe exposure limits.

--

Chen H, Qu Z, Liu W. Effects of Simulated Mobile Phone Electromagnetic Radiation on Fertilization and Embryo Development. Fetal Pediatr Pathol. 2016 Dec 16:1-7.


Abstract

This study investigated the effects of 935-MHz electromagnetic radiation (ER) on fertilization and subsequent embryonic development in mice. Ovulating mice were irradiated at three ER intensities for 4 h/day (d) or 2 h/d for three consecutive days; the ova were then harvested for in vitro fertilization to observe the 6-h fertilization rate (6-FR), 72-h morula rate (72-MR), and 110-h blastula rate (110-BR). Compared with the control group, the 6-FR, 72-MR, and 110-BR were decreased in the low ER intensity group, but the differences were not significant; in the mid- and high-intensity ER groups, 72-MR and 110-BR in the 4 h/d and 2 h/d subgroups were decreased, showing significant differences compared with the control group. Moreover, the comparison between 4 h/d and 2 h/d subgroups showed significant differences. Mid- and high-intensity ER at 935 MHz can reduce the fertilization rate in mice, and reduce the blastulation rate, thus reducing the possibility of embryo implantation.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27983879


Excerpts

Electromagnetic radiation devices consisted of four parts: a signal source (with frequency ranging from 935 to 960 MHz and magnetic field strength ranging from –15 db to +15 db), a rectifier (220 VAC/27 VDC; 300 W), a power amplifier, and a specific antenna with a length of 15 cm.

The mice were divided into seven groups by using a random table method: low-intensity (2 h/d and 4 h/d subgroups), mid-intensity (570 μW/cm2: 2 h/d and 4 h/d subgroups), high-intensity (1400 μW/cm2: 2 h/d and 4 h/d subgroups), and control groups. 

--

Stress May Diminish a Woman's Fertility, Study Suggests


First U.S. review to show a possible link between stress and how long it takes to get pregnant


Mary Brophy Marcus, HealthDay News, Mar 24, 2014


Stress may increase a woman's risk of infertility, new research suggests.

The authors of the study wanted to investigate the relationship between stress and infertility. So they looked at levels of an enzyme linked with stress in the saliva of women who were trying to get pregnant.

They also tracked the women's ability to conceive over a 12-month period.

"Women with higher levels of the stress biomarker had a two-fold increased risk of infertility," said study author Courtney Lynch. The enzyme they measured is called salivary alpha-amylase.

"Alpha-amylase is an enzyme that is secreted into the mouth that helps the body start to digest carbohydrates," said Lynch, director of reproductive epidemiology at the Ohio State University College of Medicine. "It is also linked to the fight-or-flight part of the stress system."

For the study, Lynch and her colleagues collected data from about 500 couples who were recruited from targeted counties in Texas and Michigan.

"We tried to find couples who were just starting to try to get pregnant," Lynch said. "We sent a nursing team out to their houses who did interviews and trained the women how to use saliva-collection kits."

The women took saliva samples twice -- at the start of the study and again after they'd had their first menstrual period during the study time frame. For most, that was about a month into the study, Lynch said. Since alpha-amylase can be affected by alcohol, tobacco and caffeine consumption, the researchers asked the women to take their saliva samples right after waking up in the morning.

The researchers followed the couples for up to 12 months, collecting information on whether they'd conceived.

Of the approximately 400 couples who completed the study, 87 percent of the women became pregnant. After adjusting for age, race, income and the use of alcohol, caffeine and cigarettes, the researchers found that the women with the highest alpha-amylase levels had a 29 percent lower probability of pregnancy compared to the women who had the lowest levels of the enzyme.

The study results were published in the March 24 issue of the journal Human Reproduction.
Lynch said it's important to be clear that the results do not suggest that stress alone is the reason a woman can't get pregnant.

"The message is not that everyone should go enroll in yoga tomorrow," she said. "The message is that if you've tried for five or six months and you aren't getting anywhere, maybe you should look at your lifestyle and think about whether or not stress might be a problem for you. 

And if it is, you might want to consider a stress-management program."

The authors said this is the first U.S. study to show a possible association between a stress indicator and how long it takes a woman to become pregnant.

Dr. Suleena Kansal Kalra is a reproductive endocrinology and infertility specialist at the University of Pennsylvania. She called the new research "a great first step -- it's presenting a way to measure [indicators] of stress."

"Part of the challenge is that we don't have validated [indicators] of stress hormones or validated questionnaires that measure stress, so the next step is that we really need to start validating some of these tools," said Kalra, who was not involved with the new research. 

"Ultimately, we want to know how we can measure stress, and then, can we intervene?"

Exactly how stress affects fertility is not well understood, Lynch said. The study's authors said the women in the group with higher levels of the stress-related enzyme had sex about as often as those in the low-level group, so frequency of intercourse did not play a role.

Kalra said some women stop ovulating during stressful times, while others conceive in high-stress environments.

Lynch said the researchers have also collected data on men but have not yet analyzed it, so it's not yet clear how much a man's stress might influence a couple's fertility.

Women struggling with infertility who have stressful lifestyles should not blame themselves, Lynch said. "I don't want women to see this in the news and say, 'It's my fault I'm not pregnant,'" she said. "We know stress is not the major indicator of whether or not you're going to get pregnant."

Kalra agreed, noting that, "Age is the No. 1 factor linked to the inability to conceive. Mother Nature is cruel and unfair. All our success rates are better in women under 35. That does not mean every woman in her late 30s is going to be infertile, but age is the greatest predictor of success."

She added that cigarette smoking is "absolutely associated with a decrease in the ability to become pregnant," and obesity is beginning to be looked at as well.

Kalra is launching a fertility wellness program this spring at Penn that will combine yoga, meditation, nutrition counseling and a psychologist-led support group to help women who are hoping to become pregnant.

"Not being able to start your family when you're ready to do so can create a lot of stress for couples, particularly women," Kalra said.

"I'm not sure stress is an underlying cause of infertility, and I often find it counterproductive to tell women if they're a little less stressed they would become pregnant," she said. "We don't know if that's true. I generally say, 'I want you to feel as good as possible when you're embarking on the journey to have a family.' "

More information

To learn more about reducing stress, visit the U.S. National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine.

SOURCES: Courtney Lynch, Ph.D., M.P.H., director, reproductive epidemiology, and assistant professor, obstetrics and gynecology and epidemiology, Ohio State University College of Medicine; Suleena Kansal Kalra, M.D., M.S.C.E., assistant professor, obstetrics and gynecology, and director, fertility wellness program, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia; March 24, 2014, Human Reproduction, online

http://bit.ly/1jJnHVI

---

Lynch CD, Sundaram R, Maisog JM, Sweeney AM, Buck Louis GM.Preconception stress increases the risk of infertility: results from a couple-based prospective cohort study--the LIFE study. Hum Reprod. 2014 Mar 23.

Abstract

STUDY QUESTION: Are women's stress levels prospectively associated with fecundity and infertility?

SUMMARY ANSWER: Higher levels of stress as measured by salivary alpha-amylase are associated with a longer time-to-pregnancy (TTP) and an increased risk of infertility.

WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Data suggest that stress and reproduction are interrelated; however, the directionality of that association is unclear.

STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: In 2005-2009, we enrolled 501 couples in a prospective cohort study with preconception enrollment at two research sites (Michigan and Texas, USA). Couples were followed for up to 12 months as they tried to conceive and through pregnancy if it occurred. A total of 401 (80%) couples completed the study protocol and 373 (93%) had complete data available for this analysis.

PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: Enrolled women collected saliva the morning following enrollment and then the morning following their first observed study menses for the measurement of cortisol and alpha-amylase, which are biomarkers of stress. TTP was measured in cycles. Covariate data were captured on both a baseline questionnaire and daily journals.

MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: Among the 401 (80%) women who completed the protocol, 347 (87%) became pregnant and 54 (13%) did not. After adjustment for female age, race, income, and use of alcohol, caffeine and cigarettes while trying to conceive, women in the highest tertile of alpha-amylase exhibited a 29% reduction in fecundity (longer TTP) compared with women in the lowest tertile [fecundability odds ratios (FORs) = 0.71; 95% confidence interval (CI) = (0.51, 1.00); P < 0.05]. This reduction in fecundity translated into a >2-fold increased risk of infertility among these women [relative risk (RR) = 2.07; 95% CI = (1.04, 4.11)]. In contrast, we found no association between salivary cortisol and fecundability.

LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: Due to fiscal and logistical concerns, we were unable to collect repeated saliva samples and perceived stress questionnaire data throughout the duration of follow-up. Therefore, we were unable to examine whether stress levels increased as women continued to fail to get pregnant. Our ability to control for potential confounders using time-varying data from the daily journals, however, minimizes residual confounding.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: This is the first US study to demonstrate a prospective association between salivary stress biomarkers and TTP, and the first in the world to observe an association with infertility.

STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): This study was supported by the Intramural Research Program of the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (contracts #N01-HD-3-3355, N01-HD-3-3356, N01-HD-3358). There are no conflicts of interest to declare.


http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24664130

--

Augner C, Hacker GW. Are people living next to mobile phone base stations more strained? Relationship of health concerns, self-estimated distance to base station, and psychological parameters. Indian J Occup Environ Med. 2009 Dec;13(3):141-5.

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Coeval with the expansion of mobile phone technology and the associated obvious presence of mobile phone base stations, some people living close to these masts reported symptoms they attributed to electromagnetic fields (EMF). Public and scientific discussions arose with regard to whether these symptoms were due to EMF or were nocebo effects. The aim of this study was to find out if people who believe that they live close to base stations show psychological or psychobiological differences that would indicate more strain or stress. Furthermore, we wanted to detect the relevant connections linking self-estimated distance between home and the next mobile phone base station (DBS), daily use of mobile phone (MPU), EMF-health concerns, electromagnetic hypersensitivity, and psychological strain parameters.

DESIGN, MATERIALS AND METHODS:  Fifty-seven participants completed standardized and non-standardized questionnaires that focused on the relevant parameters. In addition, saliva samples were used as an indication to determine the psychobiological strain by concentration of alpha-amylase, cortisol, immunoglobulin A (IgA), and substance P.

RESULTS:  Self-declared base station neighbors (DBS </= 100 meters) had significantly higher concentrations of alpha-amylase in their saliva, higher rates in symptom checklist subscales (SCL) somatization, obsessive-compulsive, anxiety, phobic anxiety, and global strain index PST (Positive Symptom Total). There were no differences in EMF-related health concern scales.

CONCLUSIONS:  We conclude that self-declared base station neighbors are more strained than others. EMF-related health concerns cannot explain these findings. Further research should identify if actual EMF exposure or other factors are responsible for these results.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20442833

--

Augner C, Hacker GW, Oberfeld G, Florian M, Hitzl W, Hutter J, Pauser G. Effects of exposure to GSM mobile phone base station signals on salivary cortisol, alpha-amylase, and immunoglobulin A. Biomed Environ Sci. 2010 Jun;23(3):199-207.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The present study aimed to test whether exposure to radiofrequency electromagnetic fields (RF-EMF) emitted by mobile phone base stations may have effects on salivary alpha-amylase, immunoglobulin A (IgA), and cortisol levels.

METHODS: Fifty seven participants were randomly allocated to one of three different experimental scenarios (22 participants to scenario 1, 26 to scenario 2, and 9 to scenario 3). Each participant went through five 50-minute exposure sessions. The main RF-EMF source was a GSM-900-MHz antenna located at the outer wall of the building. In scenarios 1 and 2, the first, third, and fifth sessions were "low" (median power flux density 5.2 microW/m(2)) exposure. The second session was "high" (2126.8 microW/m(2)), and the fourth session was "medium" (153.6 microW/m(2)) in scenario 1, and vice versa in scenario 2. Scenario 3 had four "low" exposure conditions, followed by a "high" exposure condition. Biomedical parameters were collected by saliva samples three times a session. Exposure levels were created by shielding curtains.

RESULTS: In scenario 3 from session 4 to session 5 (from "low" to "high" exposure), an increase of cortisol was detected, while in scenarios 1 and 2, a higher concentration of alpha-amylase related to the baseline was identified as compared to that in scenario 3. IgA concentration was not significantly related to the exposure.

CONCLUSIONS: RF-EMF in considerably lower field densities than ICNIRP-guidelines may influence certain psychobiological stress markers.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20708499

---

Nazıroğlu M, Yüksel M, Köse SA, Özkaya MO. Recent reports of Wi-Fi and mobile phone-induced radiation on oxidative stress and reproductive signaling pathways in females and males.J Membr Biol. 2013 Dec;246(12):869-75.

Abstract

Environmental exposure to electromagnetic radiation (EMR) has been increasing with the increasing demand for communication devices. The aim of the study was to discuss the mechanisms and risk factors of EMR changes on reproductive functions and membrane oxidative biology in females and males. It was reported that even chronic exposure to EMR did not increase the risk of reproductive functions such as increased levels of neoantigens abort. However, the results of some studies indicate that EMR induced endometriosis and inflammation and decreased the number of follicles in the ovarium or uterus of rats. In studies with male rats, exposure caused degeneration in the seminiferous tubules, reduction in the number of Leydig cells and testosterone production as well as increases in luteinizing hormone levels and apoptotic cells. In some cases of male and female infertility, increased levels of oxidative stress and lipid peroxidation and decreased values of antioxidants such as melatonin, vitamin E and glutathione peroxidase were reported in animals exposed to EMR. In conclusion, the results of current studies indicate that oxidative stress from exposure to Wi-Fi and mobile phone-induced EMR is a significant mechanism affecting female and male reproductive systems. However, there is no evidence to this date to support an increased risk of female and male infertility related to EMR exposure.
Conclusions

.. EMR exposure from Wi-Fi and mobile phones is related to oxidative stress and overproduction of free oxygen radicals in female and male infertility. Use of mobile phones and wireless devices has been increasing day by day. There are very scarce data on Wi-Fi-induced reproductive dysfunction in female and male individuals. However, carcinogenic and proliferative effects of mobile phones (Kim et al. 2010) and Wi-Fi (Kumar et al. 2011; Kesari et al. 2011; Nazırog˘lu et al. 2012b) have been reported in animals and cell culture systems, although there is no report on Wi-Fi- or mobile phone-induced cancer in reproductive tissues of female and male individuals. In the future, the role of EMR from mobile phones and wireless devices in female and male fertility should be investigated.

--

Shibkova DZ, Shilkova TV, Ovchinnikova AV. [Early and Delayed Effects of Radio Frequency Electromagnetic Fields on the Reproductive Function and Functional Status of the Offspring of Experimental Animals]. [Article in Russian]. Radiats Biol Radioecol. 2015 Sep-Oct;55(5):514-9.

Abstract

The aim of our experimental research was to study the impact of radio frequency electromagnetic fields (RF EMF) on the reproductive function of male and female mice of CBA in 2 models of exposure, as well as on the morphofunctional state of progeny of irradiated animals. It was found that RF EMF under conditions of repeated short-term exposures (within 5 days for 10 minutes at PES 1.2 mW/cm2) affects the course of pregnancy in female mice, the number of litters, fertility and preservation of offspring, morphometric characteristics of the offspring of experimental animals at different models of irradiation (exposure of animals to RF EMF prior to mating and during pregnancy).


http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26863782